Historicity of the canonical Gospels

I found this fascinating lecture by Dr. Timothy McGrew, on the historicity of the four Gospels and Acts. (He's a philosophy professor at Western Michigan Univ. in Kalamazoo.) I don't think I can embed it here, but follow the link. You can either listen to the audio only, or hear it while viewing the corresponding slides. I'm sure none of us are in grave doubt about this topic, but his arguments are easily portable for apologetics, and his methodology is utterly sound. Quite a good lecture.

Merry Christmas to every blessing in the new year of grace 2012!

Homily - Dec 14, 2011, Feast of St. John of the Cross (falling on Wednesday of the Third Week of Advent)

Today in my homily at the Cathedral, I started out like this:

"Turn to me and be safe, all you ends of the earth, for I am God; there is no other!" (Is 45:21) Today, as we celebrate the memorial of St. John of the Cross, the great Carmelite reformer, we note that we are two-thirds of the way through Advent. Have we done as we are called to do in this season of preparation for Christ's coming - His coming to us in our hearts, and His coming in Bethlehem in the Incarnation, and His final coming to judge the living and the dead? Have we in fact turned back to God?

I'll answer for myself, and I think most of you would agree with this answer: "Yes, but..." Yes, we love God; that's why we're here for this Mass. But, I am weak; I am easily distracted; I am subject to temptation. I know well my own failings.

But this is the great joy of the Incarnation, which has changed everything, always and everywhere: Turning to God is not something we do only once. Just as He comes to us again and again in His Church, so we can turn back to Him again and again. He always remains faithful. He longs for our conversion with a patience as great as His infinite love.

I said just a little more about using well what remains of Advent, which to be honest I can't remember very clearly. I ended with the same quote from the first reading I started on. I had intended to add another line to that quote ("Only in the LORD are just deeds and power"), and then say finish on something like "Jesus, we trust in you," but when I looked down at the lectionary, I couldn't find it. It wasn't in my head, it wasn't on the page; so I simply stopped right there.

One of the parishioners told me after Mass he thought I was going to say something else when I ended my homily. We shared a chuckle when I explained how I lost my place on the page.

St. John of the Cross, prayer for us!

Foundations of the New Evangelization

This past Saturday, the first group of US bishops completing their ad limina visit were received by Pope Benedict. His address to them is simple and compelling. These two paragraphs impart some of that sense of urgency and focus (i.e., deep hope that responds to real needs) which the Church's ministry ought to exemplify:

Many of you have shared with me your concern about the grave challenges to a consistent Christian witness presented by an increasingly secularized society. I consider it significant, however, that there is also an increased sense of concern on the part of many men and women, whatever their religious or political views, for the future of our democratic societies. They see a troubling breakdown in the intellectual, cultural and moral foundations of social life, and a growing sense of dislocation and insecurity, especially among the young, in the face of wide-ranging societal changes. Despite attempts to still the Church’s voice in the public square, many people of good will continue to look to her for wisdom, insight and sound guidance in meeting this far-reaching crisis. The present moment can thus be seen, in positive terms, as a summons to exercise the prophetic dimension of your episcopal ministry by speaking out, humbly yet insistently, in defense of moral truth, and offering a word of hope, capable of opening hearts and minds to the truth that sets us free.

At the same time, the seriousness of the challenges which the Church in America, under your leadership, is called to confront in the near future cannot be underestimated. The obstacles to Christian faith and practice raised by a secularized culture also affect the lives of believers, leading at times to that “quiet attrition” from the Church which you raised with me during my Pastoral Visit. Immersed in this culture, believers are daily beset by the objections, the troubling questions and the cynicism of a society which seems to have lost its roots, by a world in which the love of God has grown cold in so many hearts. Evangelization thus appears not simply a task to be undertaken ad extra; we ourselves are the first to need re-evangelization. As with all spiritual crises, whether of individuals or communities, we know that the ultimate answer can only be born of a searching, critical and ongoing self-assessment and conversion in the light of Christ’s truth. Only through such interior renewal will we be able to discern and meet the spiritual needs of our age with the ageless truth of the Gospel.

But his concluding paragraph is even better:

In the end, however, the renewal of the Church’s witness to the Gospel in your country is essentially linked to the recovery of a shared vision and sense of mission by the entire Catholic community. I know that this is a concern close to your own heart, as reflected in your efforts to encourage communication, discussion and consistent witness at every level of the life of your local Churches... Young people have a right to hear clearly the Church’s teaching and, most importantly, to be inspired by the coherence and beauty of the Christian message, so that they in turn can instill in their peers a deep love of Christ and his Church.

Or, much more bluntly, dissent is idolatry. When we ignore or usurp or fudge the judgment of Tradition; when we take upon ourselves the role of the Magisterium which Christ entrusted to the Apostles, to be handed on to their successors, the bishops; when we substitute our own vision for His vision for us, we commit a grave injustice. Not only do we deprive others of the right to hear Christ's voice, to see His face, unimpeded, we also claim implicitly that our voice and face are His.

Pope Benedict ties this explicitly to both the prophetic role of the hierarchy, and to their priestly role: A weakened sense of the meaning and importance of Christian worship can only lead to a weakened sense of the specific and essential vocation of the laity to imbue the temporal order with the spirit of the Gospel. We have to be at least as obedient to Tradition in the liturgy as we do in the works of charity. That doesn't mean a blind return to the past, of course, but it does mean that the past still lives for us. The "unity of shared vision" Pope Benedict is talking about is not just where we're going, but also where we've been. We have to preserve and make our own the depth and richness of the liturgical vision which is "Traditional." That includes two things Pope Benedict has preached about for decades: continuity and organic development.

Pope Benedict encourages praying the Liturgy of the Hours

At the end of his Wednesday Audience this week, Pope Benedict XVI said,

"I would like to renew my call to everyone to pray the Psalms, to become accustomed to using the Liturgy of the Hours, Lauds, Vespers, and Compline. Our relationship with God can only be enriched by our journeying towards Him day after day."

It is part of our ministry as deacons, and even already as aspirants and candidates, not only to be firmly attached ourselves to praying the Office, and letting it form and enrich us, but also to encourage and teach others to do the same. Over at New Liturgical Movement, they put up a nice post about this Wednesday audience, and some simple tips on beginning:

First, while not underestimating what you can do, do not bite off more than you can chew either... Second, establish a routine around the praying of the Divine Office... The third suggestion I would give is for you to buy a liturgical wall calendar...

It's worth reading.

Year of Faith

The Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, yesterday announced:

I would like to announce in this Eucharistic celebration I have decided to convene a ‘Year of Faith’, which I will explain in an apostolic letter. This ‘Year of Faith’ begins on October 11, 2012, on the 50th anniversary of the beginning of Vatican II, and ends on November 24, 2013, for the Solemnity of Christ, the King of the Universe. It will be a moment of grace and commitment to a more complete conversion to God, to strengthen our faith in Him and to proclaim Him with joy to the people of our time.

Here's the promised letter.

Ecclesiology and the "plan of action" that is Ministry

Given what we've said about what the Church is, and what relation she ought to have with the Polis (state, country, political unit), how do we start drawing conclusions about what the Church ought to be doing to serve all people?

The second part of the constitution Gaudium et Spes, on the Church in the modern world, lists some key areas where the ministry of the Church is particularly valuable, and ought to be particularly visible. These concerns are marriage and family life (#47ff), development of culture (#53ff), economy and society (#63ff), and politics, both intra-national (#73ff) and inter-national (#77ff). Notice that this list also progresses in the order of subsidiarity, from the smallest and most personal level to the global level. Let's take a quick look at them.

Marriage and Family Life

GS #47: The well-being of the individual person and of human and Christian society is intimately linked with the healthy condition of that community produced by marriage and family. Since the family is the domestic church, and the basic, subsidiary unit of both human and ecclesial life, the Church puts an extremely high priority on protecting and fostering healthy families. Gaudium et Spes lists some threats to married life: polygamy, divorce, fornication, abortion, contraception, worship of self and of pleasure, etc. Therefore the Church's ministry needs to address these kinds of threats, which, of course, we do on a regular basis. Clergy are (as we have always been) on the "front lines" of dealing with issues in marriages, both before and after the fact; and the Church also has resources like Catholic Charities and other Catholic professionals to help protect existing marriages, and heal broken ones (to the extent possible). Catechesis of married adults and their children, and of youth before (both remote and proximate) marriage, takes place constantly. And the witness of married couples themselves is of course critical to the success of these other efforts. All of this also needs to show up regularly in liturgical preaching.

But notice that these efforts to promote marriage and family are also "social justice" efforts. Divorce is the single greatest cause of generational poverty, and the consequences usually fall more heavily on women than men. The outcomes for children of divorced families (education levels, economic status, rates of criminal behavior and both social and physical disease, and stability of their own future marriages) are all significantly lower than for children whose parents do not divorce. All of these things also drive up taxes to support expanding social services, and may tend to imbalance the Church-State relationship and marginalize ecclesial efforts to serve in these areas. The long term costs of abortion and contraception are also devastating, not only morally (as is obvious) but also fiscally (elimination of millions of productive workers, etc, which more and more we are publicly admitting).

So, ecclesial ministry which succeeds in reducing rates of divorce, abortion, contraception, etc, and in strengthening marriage to the same extent, not only serves the individuals who benefit from that ministry directly, but also serves the Church as a whole, and the world in which she lives.

Culture

GS #53: Man comes to a true and full humanity only through culture, that is through the cultivation of the goods and values of nature. The "goods and values of nature" are of course many and diverse, and how we "cultivate" them (including both conservation/tradition and innovation/progress) gives us a distinctive "character" at a given time and place. Thus, The word "culture" in its general sense indicates everything whereby man develops and perfects his many bodily and spiritual qualities; he strives by his knowledge and his labor, to bring the world itself under his control. He renders social life more human both in the family and the civic community, through improvement of customs and institutions. Throughout the course of time he expresses, communicates and conserves in his works, great spiritual experiences and desires, that they might be of advantage to the progress of many, even of the whole human family (ibidem).

Gaudium et Spes includes as threats to culture, especially in the modern (urbanizing, industrializing, individualizing) context: technology and the pace of change, commodification of goods and human services, materialism, scientism, deracination, homogenization (loss of traditional wisdom and character), etc.

Obviously, building up families and strengthening marriage also helps preserve and strengthen culture. The human aspects of labor, social relations and engagement, exchange of goods and services, etc., are far less likely to be diminished or lost, when family life is strong and healthy. Family life is the subsidiary reality and model for all social life; its health is the barometer of culture.

In addition, GS #60-61 particularly exhorts the followers of Christ to particular forms of ministry: to support education, while maintaining the Catholic vision of the unity of knowledge within itself (against hyper-specialization in sub-disciplines), and between itself (techne) and morality (sophia); to foster the humanizing aspects of labor; to inculcate a shared commitment to duty (pietas, in its original meaning) to the common good along with personal rights; and to respect the essential differences between men and women, even in the marketplace. Clearly, education is a fundamental ministerial commitment in the Church, not only to our Catholic schools and universities, but also our RE programs, adult bible studies, and sacramental prep, etc. - not to mention upholding the fundamental right of parents to raise their children. In all these ways, the fundamental truth that we must teach is that of the human person: created and loved by God, fallen in Adam, redeemed in Christ, called to and capable of living every aspect of life in intimate union with Christ and thus in the Trinity. Family and ecclesial life, the sacraments and prayer and service must so deeply underlie every individual effort at education/formation that they cannot be separated from it.

In terms of the Church's ministry, clergy have to be present and inherently involved in the life of these institutions. Lay people, with their vocation of bringing all things under Christ's feet by their labor and witness, must work to transform these institutions more deeply into the image of Christ. All the various ways these might take place follow pretty straightforwardly.

Further, while Gaudium et Spes doesn't explicitly go here, there are implied hooks between this document and the other three conciliar Constitutions (Dei Verbum, Lumen Gentium, and especially Sacrosanctum Concilium). This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy (SC #1). Culture is never whole without religion, and in religion, liturgy ("cultus")is the primary vehicle of passing on culture. In other words, we cannot pursue social justice or the common good without a solid and enduring foundation in right worship. In short, "Save the liturgy, save the world."

Economy and Society, and Politics

From this it follows that our consistent witness in living for Christ is the engine of divinization in the world. The proclamation of the Gospel in both word and action; the authenticity of standing consistently at the foot of the Cross in all social, economic, and political situations, and in being seen publicly to stand there; and the uncompromising commitment to be the instruments of bringing the order of nature under the order of grace: these are the hallmarks of compelling ecclesial ministry, always and everywhere. For man is the source, the center, and the purpose of all economic and social life (#63). Christians who take an active part in present-day socio-economic development and fight for justice and charity should be convinced that they can make a great contribution to the prosperity of mankind and to the peace of the world. In these activities let them, either as individuals or as members of groups, give a shining example (#70).

Nod to the Natural Law

Note, finally, in this exposition of ecclesiological ministry, the implicit hierarchy of goods. In the commitment of belonging only to Christ, being pro-life comes first, and being pro-family can't really be separated from it. (Of the Ten Commandments, this immediately invokes obedience to #1, 3, 4, 5, and 6.) From these first-order goods comes the second order of "the common good," especially what is tangibly grasped in the concrete life of the community (diocesan Church, local society with vigorously healthy voluntary associations, and deeply shared engagement in economy and political life). This layer of commitment invokes the remaining five Commandments (#2 in right worship in communion with the local bishop, and #7-10 in right social relations with others). Finally, the tertiary order of goods follows, in political commitments and party platforms and identifications. In a truly healthy culture, these various tertiary commitments never differ on the first and second order goods, but may envision different means of achieving them, or may differ on aspects of prudence. How much we argue about the first- and second-order goods is a clear measure of how unhealthy our culture is today, and by implication, how disconnected from that sickness our ministry can be.

Ecclesiology - Who's in charge here, anyway??

Church-State relations have always been a bit testy. I think the apologists were mostly correct: God may have permitted states to form, "because of the hardness of our heart," but basically that power or authority is going to be used badly, as often as not. Part of the mission of the Church is to curtail that abuse, to "Christianize" the state. In a very schematic way, we can think about it in four phases:

1. Early Church, "Age of Martyrs" - characterized by a Church trying to distinguish itself clearly (in its intellectual, social, moral, and liturgical life) from everything around it (Judaism, Paganism(s), Heresies).

2. Constantinian Church - After Constantine's conversion, he intervened (or interfered) in Church matters, including disputed ownership of dioceses, public policy favoring Christians and churches (taxes, wills, etc), and theology - up to and including the First Council of Nicaea in 325. Constantine called himself "bishop for external affairs" and applied the old prerogatives of the pagan "Pontifex Maximus" to the Church. Since we're being schematic, we can say that this arrangement lasted in the East more or less until 1453.

3. Medieval Church - Pope Gelasius I offered the so-called "two-swords" theory, dividing civil and ecclesiastical power. Since we're being schematic, we can say that in the Early Middle Ages, the Church authority was independent of the state's, but generally weaker. Kings, dukes, and counts had a lot of say in Church affairs, even to choosing (or at least approving) key Church appointments. In the High and Later Middle Ages (after the Investiture Controversy), the Church's authority was independent of the state's, but generally stronger. The Church has a lot of say in political affairs, even to choosing or approving kings, marriages, and successions. Positively, it was felt that the Church, being morally free in Christ, could morally direct the use of the state's coercive power (police, law systems, justiciary); while lacking that power itself would be a check on human weakness. The state, by cooperating with the Church in this way, could be more the instrument of divine rule God had intended it to be; while not choosing the end of its own coercive power would be a check on human weakness.

4. Since the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) - The Reformation and its aftermath dramatically changed the relationship of Church and State. States in the 16th century completed the subordination of the nobility, and the extension of the powers of royal (i.e. central) government over all associated territories (formerly duchies, counties, etc). They successfully monopolized for that royal or central government the use of coercive force. The Church was now the only non-physical limit to the power of the king, or later of Parliament or Prime Minister or President. But the Church itself was both damaged and discredited in the Reformation and what followed, so it couldn't really perform that function well. The coercive power of the state was uncoupled from the Church's direction, mostly so that the competing churches couldn't use it against each other, as in the Wars of Religion and 30 Years War. The State became morally self-regulating in its use of coercion. Hence the creation of the modern "rights of man" language, that tries to set clear limits on how the state can use its unrivaled power. But since the 19th century and industrialization, that tradition has been breaking down in practice. Fascism and Communism have the same roots as we do, and in each case the State devoured itself. Liberalism (representative democracy regulating a common, relatively free market) has all the same risks.

Since the 19th century, meanwhile, the Church has been rebuilding its moral vigor. Ecumenism is overcoming the partisan divisions of the past, and the common moral vision of our Christian heritage is more easily articulated. A document like Gaudium et Spes clearly shows the desire of a united front of Christians committed to being a moral force in the world, and a check on the otherwise autonomous (unchecked) civil power which now dominates it. The pro-life battleground is the obvious place this is playing out most confrontationally. Marriage issues are quickly becoming another. Christians can - must - choose between this reinvigorated prophetic Christianity (magisterial Catholics, most Evangelicals, most Orthodox, a few other Protestants) and the limpid sold-out squooshiness of decaying hippy progressive Christianity (cafeteria Catholics, mainstream Protestants).

This makes it clear that the Church's future is with the New Evangelization. Spineless liberal Christianity, which has abandoned dogma and Tradition, rejected Revelation, and explained away every miracle of salvation history, has nothing at all with which to play its proper role in limiting the immoral abuse of the state's growing power. In accepting as "spilled milk" fornication, adultery, abortion, and homosexuality - issues, notice, where the state uses "rights" language, not to raise the moral bar, but to lower it forcibly - liberal Christianity has already capitulated to the state's modern ambition. It is without force, without hope, and without energy.

In contrast, the prophetic Christianity of the New Evangelization, both Catholic and non-Catholic, alone has the intellectual and moral capacity to curtail the modern state. In opposing fornication, adultery, abortion, and homosexuality, it correctly identifies the wedge issues through which the self-regulating state is inexorably attempting to expand its use of authority. To the extent that the Church achieves some success in resisting these social changes, it forces the state not to change the meaning of "rights" language, and to be accountable for its use of power. It therefore re-establishes the proper relationship of moral power between it and the state.

Finally, no matter how much things have changed since Pope Gelasius I at the end of the 5th century, three concrete principles still apply and must be observed by all parties:

1. The state has no power over the Church's sacramental life. This inviolable principle is dangerously at play in current marriage politics. "Tyranny" is not too strong a word for the state legistlating sacramental life. We, as clerics, have to be willing to stand on this principle and take the scorn of the sick world, like the martyrs before us - most especially on those critical wedge issues where the state tries to make inroads where it really doesn't belong.

2. The Church isn't better at politics that the politicians. Obvious, one would think, but useful to remind ourselves that our mission is souls, not politics. To be truly prophetic, one must be apolitical. Pope Benedict said some interesting things last week in Germany about the Church embracing its modern poverty (no Papal States, no great reserves of wealth like the medieval Church had, dependent on the charity of the people for its operating resources) precisely for this prophetic end.

3. Every good law is supported by the universal moral law, what Catholics call "natural law." This is the right relation between Church and state. The Church has both the right and the obligation to explain both the natural law and the divine law, revealed in Scripture; and to expect that the State will listen to this wisdom. The State simply cannot be its own moral voice; it needs the Church to teach it the natural law, and to point to the revealed law, over and over again.